Supreme Court allows SCBA meeting on election reforms, directs results be kept in sealed envelope

The Supreme Court on Monday allowed the Supreme Court Bar Association’s (SCBA) November 2 general body meeting on election reforms to proceed.

The Court, however, directed that the voting outcome not be declared and instead be placed before it in a sealed envelope.

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana passed the directions after Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta raised concerns over two proposed resolutions concerning proximity card entry into the Supreme Court premises and veteran members of the Bar.

During the hearing, CJI Kant clarified that the objective of the proposed reforms was to strengthen genuine practitioners of the Supreme Court.

“The idea is not to take away rights. Rather, the idea is to strengthen the hands of the Bar. Those who are genuinely regular visitors to the Supreme Court, having an interest in the Bar, the institution and the system, we want to strengthen their hands. All those outsiders who have nothing to do with the profession should be isolated and excluded,” said CJI Kant.

The directions came ahead of the November 5 hearing in Supreme Court Bar Association v. BD Kaushik, in which the Court is considering reforms to the SCBA's election process.

In an order passed on May 29, the Court prescribed revised eligibility criteria for SCBA elections following recommendations by a committee headed by former Supreme Court Justice L Nageswara Rao and suggestions from the Association and other members of the Bar.

Among other things, the Court directed that proximity card entries, which record advocates’ entry into the Supreme Court premises, could be used only as corroborative evidence of eligibility and not as the sole criterion. It also provided that veteran members who had held SCBA membership for more than 25 years would be eligible to vote, subject to the conditions specified in the order.

During Monday's hearing, Gupta told the Court that the SCBA had called a special general body meeting on November 2 to pass two resolutions concerning the May 29 order.

“We are not opposing any resolution. But the matter is due to be heard on November 5, and we were not consulted,” he said.

SCBA President and Senior Advocate Pradeep Rai responded that the Association wanted to consult its members before conveying its views to the Court.

“Mr Gupta, we have the highest respect for you. If you had any issue, you could have called me. Instead of coming to this Court, we could have resolved it. Why waste the valuable time of this Court?” added Rai.

Gupta then objected to the meeting being held before the Court considered the matter.

“To have a general body meeting in the teeth of the Court’s order appears to be overreaching the Court,” he said.

CJI Kant, however, noted that the committee appointed by the Court to examine the reforms was acting under its directions.

“The entire team are our experts. Whatever they propose, whatever they do, it is only at the instance of the Court,” he said.

Rai also submitted that the SCBA had decided to consult its members rather than convey its opinion directly through the executive committee.

However, Gupta pointed out that the resolutions would become binding immediately if passed.

CJI Kant then said the meeting could proceed, but its outcome would have to be submitted to the Court without being declared.

“Now that you have called the meeting, you may go ahead, but do not declare the outcome. Keep it in a sealed envelope and produce it before the Court,” he said.

Rai assured the Court that the results would not be declared. Additionally, the Court also asked the lawyers to remain present on November 5 and continue assisting the Court in the matter.

[Read Live Coverage]